What is your end times view on the rapture?

[iamlamad]

Not so. The passage is very clear. We change in the Twinkling of an eye, at the same time the dead in Christ arise. Daniel 12:2 tells us that this RAPTURE/Harpazo/Catching Away happens at the same time as the TIME OF TROUBLE in Daniel 12:1. This was basically a secret to old testament readers, this is why its not woven throughout the bible, it happens mostly to the Gentile Church, but the Dead in Christ and the Dead Saints (Pre-Jesus) of Israel all go to Heaven at the same time. The Rapture actually happens before the Time of Trouble, but "at about the same time" so Daniel really didn't even understand it.

Revelation 19 clearly tells us the Saints are in Heaven, Marrying the Lamb, then we ride back to earth on White Horses, and destroy the Anti-Christ. This book has been around almost 2000 years. There can be no Revelation 19 without a rapture, that's simple logic.

We have all the scriptures, we can use our computers to study root-words etc. etc. We can see the Rapture, it is interwoven throughout the bible.

Isn't it amazing how the posttribbers rearrange chapter 19 to fit their theory? As you have pointed out, the wedding and supper taken place in heaven, and then, after that, Jesus descends.

Plain and simple: with the truth, no need is ever found to rearrange.

 

[iamlamad]

I'm not saying Paul didn't write it. I'm saying that up until Darby et al. The harpazo was always understood that it would
happen on the same day as Jesus returns.

If you look closely at the classic rapture passage in 1 Thes. 4, Paul tells us it is a "coming." It will be "the second" coming. So is a coming a return? I think so; only at the second coming Jesus does not touch down. He will remain in the air. But make no mistake, it is a coming.

 

[iamlamad]

You say tomato, I don't. But if it did happen it would be a lovely surprise.

Now we are talking vegetables?

 

[iamlamad]

Lamad said:

Your preconceptions are slipping into your argument. I.E. the "gathering" is equated with "the day of the Lord." That is a preconception you come with. I come with just the opposite: that the rapture will come before the Day of the Lord, which is why they were so upset: they thought they had MISSED the pretrib rapture.

My ”preconceptions” on this topic are formed by scripture.

So are mine! We both believe what we think the scriptures tell us, so we are back to square one.
The thing that neither of us know for sure is this: did Paul write "day of the Lord" or "Day of Christ?" And in the mind of Paul was there a difference?

I lean heavily to "day of the Lord" because my favorite translations, such as the Amplified, render it so.

But suppose Paul did mean "day of Christ" and by that meant the day of the rapture. Those folks were very troubled because they were still on earth and they thought the Day of Christ has already come. OF COURSE they would be troubled if this was the scenario.

However, then we run into a problem, for Paul's argument is that the departure must come first and then the man of sin revealed. When people see these things come to pass, then they will KNOW that their are in the Day of Christ.

Sorry! That does not work! If indeed the day of Christ is the day of the rapture, that event will take less that one second. So what then would be the next day? Since they thought they were IN IT as it it had already started - Paul's argument is, NO! It has not started and you are NOT in it. When you see the great departure and then see the man of sin revealed, THEN you are in it, and you can be sure of it.

My problem with this is, it is the DAY OF THE LORD that will start just before the man of sin is revealed. We see that at the 6th seal. And shortly after that, I believe the Antichrist will be revealed.

Therefore I think as most of the modern translators thought, that "day of the Lord" is the right one.

 

[BABerean2]

Isn't it amazing how the posttribbers rearrange chapter 19 to fit their theory? As you have pointed out, the wedding and supper taken place in heaven, and then, after that, Jesus descends.

Plain and simple: with the truth, no need is ever found to rearrange.

Right...

Forget the time of the judgment of the dead in Revelation 11:18.

Forget the birth and death of the man-child, who is Christ, in Revelation chapter 12.

Forget the "harvest" of Revelation chapter 14.

Forget when He comes as a thief at Armageddon in Revelation 16:15-16.

No need at all to rearrange any of the text...

.

 

[Revealing Times]

Jesus said if "another comes in his own name" the Jews will receive him...John 5:43... Jesus came to offer the kingdom of heaven to the Jews and they did not accept him as the messiah. To this day they still await another...

Jesus prophecied that another would come "in his own name" and not sent from the father that the Jews will accept...

The Jews have never accepted a messiah or claim the messiah has come because no son of David has yet fulfilled messianic prophecies...

In order for the Jews to receive "another who comes in his own name", this man must fulfill messianic prophecies which they believe the messiah must fulfill to be genuine....

Go study this subject a little more. You will find out that the Jewish leaders of the Day thought the Roman occupation was the "End Times" the prophets had spoken of, so they were looking for a Conquering King, to lead them to victory over Rome, and they were trying to wipe out the little "Jesus Movement", so they indeed had a few people they deemed to be the Messiah right after Jesus' death. The whole Revolt against Rome, which led to Rome destroying the Temple. I have studied this in depth. These Jewish leaders, Pharisees actually tried to force a Messiah. This was what Peter wanted Jesus to do, fight when they came for the Master. People always overlook these things and think it means Israel will accept the Anti-Christ at the end, but scripture says different.

You see, you are looking to far ahead on this passage, and dismissing that the Pharisees actually were looking for the Messiah 2000 years ago.

I will lend you a little info here brother, have you ever heard of Simon bar Kokhba ? He led the bar Kokhba revolt, the last revolt against Rome in 132-135 AD. He revived the Jewish state and ruled it THREE YEARS as the nasi (PRINCE)................LOL.

Documents discovered in the 20th century in the Cave of Letters give his original name, with variations: Simeon bar Kosevah (Hebrew: שמעון בר כוסבה‎‎), Bar Koseva (בר כוסבא) or Ben Koseva (בן כוסבא‎).[2] It is probable that his original name was Bar Koseva.[3] The name may indicate that his father or his place of origin was named Koseva(h),[4] but might as well be a general family name.[3]

The Jewish sage Rabbi Akiva indulged the possibility that Simon could be the Jewish messiah, and gave him the surname "Bar Kokhba" meaning "Son of the Star" in Aramaic, from the Star Prophecy verse from Numbers 24:17: "There shall come a star out of Jacob".[5]

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

There was more, but this was the very last one the claimed to be the Messiah. This is what Jesus was speaking of, the END TIMES shows Israel turning to God after the Rapture.

This got longer than I intended, so I will make another post, and finish up. I hope this gives you some clarity.

 

[Revealing Times]

When one day a man comes and seems to fulfill messianic prophecies and the Jews receive his new covenant and hail him as the messiah then he will fulfill Jesus prophecy as the one who "comes in his own name" and not sent from the "fathers name" as Jesus was sent who they reject

This prophecy of Jesus has yet to be fulfilled...

Fulfilled, probably many, many times.

This throws off kilter what you are looking for later on. The Bible clearly shows Israel accepts Jesus as their Messiah before the Day of the Lord comes, and that God protects Israel in the Wilderness. It also shows they have an AGREEMENT with this man who Double Crosses them. Lets use this logic. If this man claims t be God, and Jesus took him in as their Messiah, then why would they reject him when he says I AM GOD ? Why would they FLEE ? Why would they be STUNNED and SHOCKED that he says he is God ? And last but not least id they accepted this Anti-Christ as their "Messiah" why would he have to CONQUER THEM ? You see all this bad logic you have to overcome ? Logic that makes NO SENSE.

We get things in our heads, and we just let it overtake our critical thinking at times. Many posts point to Israel turning to Jesus Christ before the Abomination of Desolation.

Other scriptures reveals many false messiahs yet to come after he who "comes in his own name" that the Jews accept as the true messiah ...Matthew 24:24 reveals more than one false messiah ... This scripture implies that when this messiah and king of Israel reigns and eventually dies, his sons will reign after him as newly anointed messiah and king of Israel

Each false messiah to come during this false messianic age and anointed to rule will be anti-messiah

It is not known how long this false messianic era will last but it will last until the final anti-messiah comes..

Where are you getting all this from ? Matthew 24:24 is all about Israel fleeing into the Mountain, after the ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION, so this verse is referring to the Anti-Christ and "FALSE PROPHET" who try and trick the Jewish Peoples into leaving their place of safety, Jesus says do not go unto them, for I will come in the EASTERN SKIES.

The great tribulation will then begin and Israel must flee to Petra for safety

Tribulation is happening before Matthew 24:24......Mathew 24:21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

 

[Revealing Times]

Right...

Forget the time of the judgment of the dead in Revelation 11:18.

Forget the birth and death of the man-child, who is Christ, in Revelation chapter 12.

Forget the "harvest" of Revelation chapter 14.

Forget when He comes as a thief at Armageddon in Revelation 16:15-16.

No need at all to rearrange any of the text...

.

I don't know if you are forgetting, or just don'y understand. Much of Revelation OVERLAPS !!

Revelation 19 goes from Revelation 5-16.

Revelation 17 happens in Revelation 6 and 7

Revelation 18 happens from Revelation 6-16 and is all the Seals, Trumpets and Vials coming against Babylon.

These are overlapping chapters.

 

[dfw69]

Go study this subject a little more. You will find out that the Jewish leaders of the Day thought the Roman occupation was the "End Times" the prophets had spoken of, so they were looking for a Conquering King, to lead them to victory over Rome, and they were trying to wipe out the little "Jesus Movement", so they indeed had a few people they deemed to be the Messiah right after Jesus' death. The whole Revolt against Rome, which led to Rome destroying the Temple. I have studied this in depth. These Jewish leaders, Pharisees actually tried to force a Messiah. This was what Peter wanted Jesus to do, fight when they came for the Master. People always overlook these things and think it means Israel will accept the Anti-Christ at the end, but scripture says different.

I heard this before and I believe it to be true concerning Rome's power over Israel and the beliefs and effects of that time...there is also the prophecy which many believed the messiah was coming soon in their day .... we know Jesus fulfilled that prophecy

You see, you are looking to far ahead on this passage, and dismissing that the Pharisees actually were looking for the Messiah 2000 years ago.

I will lend you a little info here brother, have you ever heard of Simon bar Kokhba ? He led the bar Kokhba revolt, the last revolt against Rome in 132-135 AD. He revived the Jewish state and ruled it THREE YEARS as the nasi (PRINCE)................LOL.

Documents discovered in the 20th century in the Cave of Letters give his original name, with variations: Simeon bar Kosevah (Hebrew: שמעון בר כוסבה‎‎), Bar Koseva (בר כוסבא) or Ben Koseva (בן כוסבא‎).[2] It is probable that his original name was Bar Koseva.[3] The name may indicate that his father or his place of origin was named Koseva(h),[4] but might as well be a general family name.[3]

The Jewish sage Rabbi Akiva indulged the possibility that Simon could be the Jewish messiah, and gave him the surname "Bar Kokhba" meaning "Son of the Star" in Aramaic, from the Star Prophecy verse from Numbers 24:17: "There shall come a star out of Jacob".[5]

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

There was more, but this was the very last one the claimed to be the Messiah.

Yes sir I have heard of him . You believe Jesus prophecy was fulfilled by Simon bar kokkba?... I don't ...

Please hear me out ...what If Simon was not who Jesus was referring to? What if jesus was referring to a dynasty of messiahs? Then the falling away would take on a whole new picture ... imagine what that era will look like ...temple worship ... Jews found their messiah... Jesus had not return ... where is Jesus? ... peace on earth... no war famine plague... would you be deceived if you faced such an era? Would you fall away?

Teachings of Torah proving the Jewish messiah is the true one and Jesus is false...the law persecuting sinners ...condemning saints ...much more we have yet to see in this future false messianic age from the one who "comes in his own name" and 10 kingdoms form ... this is what I believe mystery Babylon is, the false messianic age

This is what Jesus was speaking of, the END TIMES shows Israel turning to God after the Rapture.

This got longer than I intended, so I will make another post, and finish up. I hope this gives you some clarity.

Actually the end times reveal that after the false messianic age and 10 kingdoms along with many false messiahs and false prophets that have deceived many that a little horn will rise up and the 10 kingdoms who were once in alliance with Judah will rise up to punish and persecute the land of israel

This little horn is the final antichrist and yes the Jews will reject him and flee to Petra and be saved by Jesus ...

Thanks for your replies... peace bro

 

[dfw69]

Fulfilled, probably many, many times.

This throws off kilter what you are looking for later on. The Bible clearly shows Israel accepts Jesus as their Messiah before the Day of the Lord comes, and that God protects Israel in the Wilderness. It also shows they have an AGREEMENT with this man who Double Crosses them. Lets use this logic. If this man claims t be God, and Jesus took him in as their Messiah, then why would they reject him when he says I AM GOD ? Why would they FLEE ? Why would they be STUNNED and SHOCKED that he says he is God ? And last but not least id they accepted this Anti-Christ as their "Messiah" why would he have to CONQUER THEM ? You see all this bad logic you have to overcome ? Logic that makes NO SENSE.

I think you may be misunderstanding my theory.... when the Jews accept a messiah, he will be an antichrist and when he dies and his sons reign after him , they too will be antichrist, for they will not be in the faith ...

But the final man of sin who we also call antichrist will be the one the Jews reject... understand?

A false messianic age comes first .this is mystery Babylon and 10 kingdoms and the falling away from the faith

The final antichrist will be born much later and will become king of one of the 10 kingdoms and will conquer 3 kings and the rest will eventually follow him to Jerusalem

Many posts point to Israel turning to Jesus Christ before the Abomination of Desolation.

I agree

Where are you getting all this from ? Matthew 24:24 is all about Israel fleeing into the Mountain, after the ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION, so this verse is referring to the Anti-Christ and "FALSE PROPHET" who try and trick the Jewish Peoples into leaving their place of safety, Jesus says do not go unto them, for I will come in the EASTERN SKIES.

Actually Jesus says false messiahs (plural) and false prophets come first to deceive many which will eventually lead to the abomination of desolation

Tribulation is happening before Matthew 24:24......Mathew 24:21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. 22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened.

Yes a great tribulation is coming one day at the hands of the final antichrist but tribulation also comes from 10 kingdoms and mystery Babylon which is the false messianic age

The final antichrist will destroy mystery Babylon and claim to be god .. he will end the false messianic age

 

[Revealing Times]

I heard this before and I believe it to be true concerning Rome's power over Israel and the beliefs and effects of that time...there is also the prophecy which many believed the messiah was coming soon in their day .... we know Jesus fulfilled that prophecy

He fulfilled half of it, the Suffering Messiah they weren't looking for. He hasn't fulfilled the Conquering King half yet, Jesus will do that when he Returns to conquer the Anti-Christ and his minions.

Yes sir I have heard of him . You believe Jesus prophecy was fulfilled by Simon bar kokkba?... I don't ...

That's not the point, I believe the passage you referenced about Jesus prophesying, "if another comes in his own name, you will receive him" etc. etc. That is the point, it was not an end time prophecy, Jesus was speaking about them cleaving to other Messiahs, right after rejecting him. I don't believe that it can be fulfilled in the true END TIMES, because of SCRIPTURES....Its not just a guess....So it had to be at the time I mentioned, and it happened a few times. But it can not happen at the end times or in the future, because the Holy Scriptures say different.

Please hear me out ...what If Simon was not who Jesus was referring to? What if jesus was referring to a dynasty of messiahs? Then the falling away would take on a whole new picture ... imagine what that era will look like ...temple worship ... Jews found their messiah... Jesus had not return ... where is Jesus? ... peace on earth... no war famine plague... would you be deceived if you faced such an era? Would you fall away?

I don't do ifs...and I can show you my understandings via scriptures, remember, I say things, then I back them up with scripture if needed, in a manner that's obvious (because revealed truth is obvious, Amen). That falling away in 2 Thess. 2 is the Church Departing. It just is. The KJV is written in a weird manner. The first seven ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS had Departure, the Latin Vulgate for 1000 years had departure, and the Subject was the Gathering unto the Lord. And not being in Gods Wrath. It had nothing to do with FAITH, in that passage.

I can show you where the Jews accept their Messiah Jesus before the Abomination of Desolation happens.

Teachings of Torah proving the Jewish messiah is the true one and Jesus is false...the law persecuting sinners ...condemning saints ...much more we have yet to see in this future false messianic age from the one who "comes in his own name" and 10 kingdoms form ... this is what I believe mystery Babylon is, the false messianic age

There is no Mystery Babylon, I did a thread on "Mystery Babylon" here:
Babylon, The Harlot and the Seven Headed Beast Explained

Pretty informative if you have not seen it. The Angel in Rev. 17 clearly explains who the Harlot and the Beast she rides on is. THIS CHAPTER IS KEY..... There are 10 Kings, that give their Kingdoms to the Beast and they arise out of the Fourth Beast, BUT....... at the End Time. But Israel only makes a PEACE/SECURITY Deal/Agreement with them. Remember, Covenant only means Agreement. NOT HOLY AGREEMENT. Only God makes a Holy Covenant. All Covenants by men, are merely agreements. The Jews will accept Jesus....tomorrow I can show you this, tonight....SLEEPY.

Actually the end times reveal that after the false messianic age and 10 kingdoms along with many false messiahs and false prophets that have deceived many that a little horn will rise up and the 10 kingdoms who were once in alliance with Judah will rise up to punish and persecute the land of israel

This little horn is the final antichrist and yes the Jews will reject him and flee to Petra and be saved by Jesus ...

Thanks for your replies... peace bro

My understanding, by the Holy Spirit, is in the link I posted.


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

God Bless

 

[Guide To The Bible]

If one happens in the Twinkling of an Eye, and the other happens first, the basically they both happen at the same time. God commands and it is done. You have one done in a MOMENT so I imagine the first order also takes a MOMENT, so its two moments back to back.

Greek word for Twinkling = rhipe which means:
1) a throw, stroke, beat
2) a moment of time

From G4496; a jerk (of the eye, that is, (by analogy) an instant):—twinkling.

So lets face it, they basically happen at the same time, it only takes God an INSTANT to call our soul unto him. Our bodies do not go, we die.



The Two-witnesses do die a short time before Jesus' return, the Seven Vials are the LAST WOE and the two-witnesses die and ascend at the end of the Second Woe. I think the Last Seven Vials will be very quick, a month or less.

The 144,000 could be many things, but one thing is certain, they are virgin Jews. But the Rapture happens way (SEVEN YEARS) before the Second Coming.



I have thought this also, but either way, it doesn't really matter, so I never press it. The one thief was said to be with Jesus in paradise that very day, there were Saints who arose when Jesus died etc. etc. But the facts are the DEAD IN CHRIST RISE FIRST....Then we that are Alive....

The Dead in Christ arise first THEN WE MEET THEN IN THE AIR. You have to study this..... BELOW:
THE JEWISH WEDDING PATTERN (The Jewish Wedding Pattern)

This holds the Key to understanding the Rapture.......

I agree with much of that and looked at the wedding pattern link but I don't believe in a pre-trib rapture. Be a nice surprise if it happens though

Regarding Jesus going to Paradise; After Jesus’ death His Spirit actually descended into Hell:

1 Peter 3:18-20
18 Christ suffered for our sins once for all time. He never sinned, but he died for sinners to bring you safely home to God. He suffered physical death, but he was raised to life in the Spirit. 19 So he went and preached to the spirits in prison 20 those who disobeyed God long ago when God waited patiently while Noah was building his boat.

And . . .

1 Peter 4:6
For this is the reason the Gospel was preached even to those who are now dead, so that they might be judged
according to human standards in regard to the body, but live according to God in regard to the spirit.

Jesus Himself alluded to the fact that he was going to descend to Hell after his death:

John 10:16
“I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there
shall be one flock, and one shepherd.”

And . . .

Luke 23:43
Jesus answered [to the criminal on the cross next to] him, “Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.”

Paradise is the name of three different places in the Bible: Eden, a garden in Heaven, and a place where the righteous
went after death:

Luke 16:22-26
22 “But that poor man died and Angels brought him to The Bosom of Abraham. And the rich man also died and
he was buried.” 23 “And suffering in Sheol, he lifted up his eyes from afar off, and he saw Abraham, and Lazarus
in his bosom.” 24 “And he called in a loud voice and he said, ‘My father, Abraham, have pity on me, and send
Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water, and moisten my tongue for me; behold, I am suffering in this flame.” 25
“Abraham said to him, ‘My son, remember that you have received your good things in your life, and Lazarus, his
evil things, and now, behold, he is comforted here, and you are suffering.” 26 “And along with all these things, there
stands a great abyss between us, and you, so that those who would pass from here to you are not able, neither is
whoever is there able to pass over to us.’

Here Jesus describes two different parts of Sheol (Hebrew for Hell), separated by an Abyss that is also mentioned in
the book of Revelation:

Revelation 20:3
He threw him into the Abyss, and locked and sealed it over him, to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until
the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time.

It was this preaching in Hell when Jesus fulfilled the second feast, known as the Feast of Unleavened Bread and then after He had resurrected He confirmed that He had as yet to ascend to Heaven, as He told Mary:

John 20:17
Jesus said, “Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell
them, ‘I am ascending to my Father, and your Father, to my God, and your God.”

Because Jesus was ceremonially clean, He could not let anyone touch Him until He had presented Himself before
God. After He had done this Jesus was seen again by the women who were hurrying back from the tomb, where He
then allowed them to touch Him:

Matthew 28:8-9
8 So the women hurried away from the tomb, afraid yet filled with joy, and ran to tell his disciples. 9 Suddenly
Jesus met them. “Greetings,” he said. They came to him, clasped his feet, and worshipped him.

So on the third day Jesus rose from death and ascended to Heaven on the morning of First Fruits’, day 16 of Aviv. Every year on this day the High Priest waved the first sheaf of the barley harvest before the LORD and burnt the offering of fine barley flour on the altar of incense in the temple. That morning Jesus ascended to Heaven as the first fruits offering to God, thus fulfilling the day of first fruits which was the third holy day Jesus fulfilled in that year:

1 Corinthians 15:20
But Christ has indeed been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep.

This shows that Jesus ascended to Heaven at the same time the high priest would have been presenting the first fruits
wave offering in the temple. Again this ritual had been practised for over a thousand years. So Jesus did not take the thief next to him straight to Heaven as you believe.



Also please watch this that helps explain the Jewish question about the 144,000:

 

[Guide To The Bible]

If you look closely at the classic rapture passage in 1 Thes. 4, Paul tells us it is a "coming." It will be "the second" coming. So is a coming a return? I think so; only at the second coming Jesus does not touch down. He will remain in the air. But make no mistake, it is a coming.

Well it say: 16For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first.

And we're told: Zechariah 14 3Then the Lord will go out and fight against those nations, as he fights on a day of battle. 4On that day his feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives will be split in two from east to west, forming a great valley, with half of the mountain moving north and half moving south.

But if you don't think He will land on the earth on that day when do you think He will? And where do you think He will go after meeting us in the air?

 

[Guide To The Bible]

Now we are talking vegetables?

You say vegetable I say fruit

 

[Postvieww]

So are mine! We both believe what we think the scriptures tell us, so we are back to square one.
The thing that neither of us know for sure is this: did Paul write "day of the Lord" or "Day of Christ?" And in the mind of Paul was there a difference?

I lean heavily to "day of the Lord" because my favorite translations, such as the Amplified, render it so.

But suppose Paul did mean "day of Christ" and by that meant the day of the rapture. Those folks were very troubled because they were still on earth and they thought the Day of Christ has already come. OF COURSE they would be troubled if this was the scenario.

However, then we run into a problem, for Paul's argument is that the departure must come first and then the man of sin revealed. When people see these things come to pass, then they will KNOW that their are in the Day of Christ.

Sorry! That does not work! If indeed the day of Christ is the day of the rapture, that event will take less that one second. So what then would be the next day? Since they thought they were IN IT as it it had already started - Paul's argument is, NO! It has not started and you are NOT in it. When you see the great departure and then see the man of sin revealed, THEN you are in it, and you can be sure of it.

My problem with this is, it is the DAY OF THE LORD that will start just before the man of sin is revealed. We see that at the 6th seal. And shortly after that, I believe the Antichrist will be revealed.

Therefore I think as most of the modern translators thought, that "day of the Lord" is the right one.

Lamad said:

So are mine! We both believe what we think the scriptures tell us, so we are back to square one.

Well at least try to use some of them in a response!

The thing that neither of us know for sure is this: did Paul write "day of the Lord" or "Day of Christ?" And in the mind of Paul was there a difference?

This is a diversion and trying to answer a question that was not asked. Paul did write "day of Christ" believe it.

I lean heavily to "day of the Lord" because my favorite translations, such as the Amplified, render it so.

Yes I know and you have a favorite translation for “departure” too and it is not the Amplified. The Amplified disagrees with your definition of falling away and says ”apostasy comes first [that is, the great rebellion, the abandonment of the faith by professed Christians]”. Let’s at least pretend to be a little consistent here

But suppose Paul did mean "day of Christ" and by that meant the day of the rapture. Those folks were very troubled because they were still on earth and they thought the Day of Christ has already come. OF COURSE they would be troubled if this was the scenario.

I suggest you go back to my post #231 and really try to answer the points raised as stated. This response to the points I raised is not up to even being a weak response.


The three examples I gave, and there are more, did say Day of Christ, the same as 2 Thess. And Paul did say what he meant to say. Your shameless attempt to change this text and redefine it after preaching to us about rearranging Revelation is amazing.

Sorry! That does not work! If indeed the day of Christ is the day of the rapture, that event will take less that one second. So what then would be the next day? Since they thought they were IN IT as it it had already started - Paul's argument is, NO! It has not started and you are NOT in it. When you see the great departure and then see the man of sin revealed, THEN you are in it, and you can be sure of it.

My problem with this is, it is the DAY OF THE LORD that will start just before the man of sin is revealed. We see that at the 6th seal. And shortly after that, I believe the Antichrist will be revealed.

Your real problem is that you do not have a leg to stand on when trying make this passage say what you want it to say.

Therefore I think as most of the modern translators thought, that "day of the Lord" is the right one.

Listen to yourself you are not responding to my post you are rambling and ignoring every point I raised.


Let’s try discussing what the text says and compare it to other like scriptures, not what you want it to mean. I don’t even see this as a serious attempt to refute my post, please go back and reread it and refute it with scripture.

 

[iamlamad]

I don't know if you are forgetting, or just don'y understand. Much of Revelation OVERLAPS !!

Revelation 19 goes from Revelation 5-16.

Revelation 17 happens in Revelation 6 and 7

Revelation 18 happens from Revelation 6-16 and is all the Seals, Trumpets and Vials coming against Babylon.

These are overlapping chapters.

Sorry, you may think this, but your thinking will not make it truth. In fact, it is so far from truth it is almost laughable.

You just don't understand John's Chronology.
Revelation 19 covers events AFTER the 70th week has finished.
Revelation 17 and 18 covers events after the 70th week has finished, but before the events in chapter 19. I might add, exactly the way John wrote it.

Axiom on Revelation:
ANY theory that must rearrange John's God given chronology is immediately suspect and WILL BE proven wrong.

 

[Postvieww]

As always CONTEXT is king. "Departure from what?"

What is the THEME of the passage? The gathering. In first Thes. we know the "gathering" will be a departure from this world. John 14 tells us the very same thing: our destination will be to the homes, mansions, abodes that Jesus went to heaven to prepare us for.

You are still ignoring the obvious: verses 6-8 is explaining verse 3 in more detail. Of course you don't wish to admit this for then it will be very obvious that in verse 3 it is "apostasia" that allows the man of sin to be revealed; in verse 6 it is "what "withholdeth" or is restraining or holding back, "so that he will be revealed in his time, and it verses 7 & 8 it is the one "taken out of the way" "and then the lawless one will be revealed."

If you know anything about the rules of math, you should recognize that "Apostasia," and "Restraining" and ""taken out of the way" are all equivalent in meaning for in each case the result is the same: the man of sin revealed.

Paul is setting up an argument so that anyone would be able to KNOW when they are IN the Day of the Lord. Therefore, the significant apostasia MUST be easily recognized or Paul's argument is weak. People would be wondering: has enough fallen away so that the man of sin will be revealed? Indeed, they would have to wait for revealing, and then they would know that enough had fallen away.

On the other hand, if Paul was talking about the departure of the church, now that would be a very significant event that ALL WOULD recognize, and know. And, after all, that is the THEME of the passage.

Lamad said:

As always CONTEXT is king. "Departure from what?"

The definition of the word, and the way it is used in Acts 21:21 answers your question but you choose to ignore that in favor or your opinion.

What is the THEME of the passage? The gathering. In first Thes. we know the "gathering" will be a departure from this world. John 14 tells us the very same thing: our destination will be to the homes, mansions, abodes that Jesus went to heaven to prepare us for.

Diversion and another topic.

You are still ignoring the obvious: verses 6-8 is explaining verse 3 in more detail. Of course you don't wish to admit this for then it will be very obvious that in verse 3 it is "apostasia" that allows the man of sin to be revealed; in verse 6 it is "what "withholdeth" or is restraining or holding back, "so that he will be revealed in his time, and it verses 7 & 8 it is the one "taken out of the way" "and then the lawless one will be revealed."

Just go back to my post and answer the questions I ask! I believe there are 9 of them.

If you know anything about the rules of math, you should recognize that "Apostasia," and "Restraining" and ""taken out of the way" are all equivalent in meaning for in each case the result is the same: the man of sin revealed.

We are not doing fuzzy math here we are reading the Holy Scriptures.

Paul is setting up an argument so that anyone would be able to KNOW when they are IN the Day of the Lord. Therefore, the significant apostasia MUST be easily recognized or Paul's argument is weak. People would be wondering: has enough fallen away so that the man of sin will be revealed? Indeed, they would have to wait for revealing, and then they would know that enough had fallen away.

We don’t know how many some are in 1 Timothy 4:1 nor do we need to know, just as we don’t know how may are involved in the falling away, nor do we need to know. That number is not relevant since when the man of sin is revealed everyone will know it and the number that fell away is irrelevant at that point. You are attempting to come up with some kind of argument to detract from what the passage actually says because you are desperate to eliminate the clear meaning of this passage from the discussion on this topic.

On the other hand, if Paul was talking about the departure of the church, now that would be a very significant event that ALL WOULD recognize, and know. And, after all, that is the THEME of the passage.

Since you recognize the “gathering” is the theme of the passage why can’t you recognize the “falling away” and “man of sin” being revealed will happen first. If you will go back to my post and answer every question that would be all of the ones that end with a? you will find the answer to many of these points you raise.

 

[dfw69]

He fulfilled half of it, the Suffering Messiah they weren't looking for. He hasn't fulfilled the Conquering King half yet, Jesus will do that when he Returns to conquer the Anti-Christ and his minions.

I agree

That's not the point, I believe the passage you referenced about Jesus prophesying, "you if another comes in his own name, you will receive him" etc. etc. That is the point, it was not an end time prophecy, Jesus was speaking about them cleaving to other Messiahs, right after rejecting him. I don't believe that it can be fulfilled in the true END TIMES, because of SCRIPTURES....Its not just a guess.....So it had to be at the time I mentioned, by it happened a few times. But it can not happen at the end times or in the future, because the Holy Scriptures say different.

Scripture reveals a temple will be rebuilt and only the messiah can build the temple according to the scriptures ... this will take place during the false messianic age .. everything centers around the land of Israel... a temple must be rebuilt first for end times to take place for the final antichrist and man of sin will sit in that future temple as god and persecuted those who will not believe and worship him or his idol...

I don't do ifs...

Lol ok if you wish to believe that Simon was the fulfillment of his prophecy be my guess ... but I'm afraid that's not the case ... the fulfillment is still yet to come ... end times reveal many false messiahs yet to come .. a dynasty if you will ..and points toward Jerusalem and the temple

and I can show you my understandings via scriptures, remember, I say things, then I back them up with scripture if needed, in a manner that's obvious (because revealed truth is obvious, Amen). That falling away in 2 Thess. 2 is the Church Departing. It just is. The KJV s written in a weird manner. The first seven ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS had Departure, the Latin Vulgate for 1000 years had departure, and the Subject was the Gathering unto the Lord. And not being in Gods Wrath. It had nothing to do with FAITH, in that passage.

I do see that the departure could refer to the rapture ... no need to convince me ...

I can show you where the Jews accept their Messiah Jesus before the Abomination of Desolation happens.

Sure go ahead...

There is no Mystery Babylon, I did a thread on Mystery Babylon here:
Babylon, The Harlot and the Seven Headed Beast Explained

Pretty informative if you have not sen it. The Angel in Rev. 17 clearly explains who the Harlot and the Beast she rides on is. THIS CHAPTER IS KEY..... There is 10 Kings, that give their Kingdoms to the Beast and they arise out of the Fourth Beast, BUT at the End Time. But Israel only makes a PEACE/SECURITY Deal/Agreement with them. Remember, Covenant only means Agreement. NOT HOLY AGREEMENT. Only God makes a Holy Covenant. All Covenants by men, are merely agreements. The Jews will accept Jesus, tomorrow I can show you this, tonight SLEEPY.....................



My understanding, by the Holy Spirit, is in the link I posted.

I'll check it out ...but mystery Babylon is to be destroyed by the future 10 kings for they shall hate the harlot strip her naked and burn her with fire ...and they shall give their power to the beast...

why do they end up hating her?... my guess is because they were deceived by her into believing in the false messianic age which caused judgement of god to fall upon them ...

a future judgement awaits mystery Babylon according to revelation and the saints will rejoice over her destruction because she has persecuted prophets and saints for a long time

God Bless

Same to you brother

 

[iamlamad]

The thing that neither of us know for sure is this: did Paul write "day of the Lord" or "Day of Christ?" And in the mind of Paul was there a difference?

This is a diversion and trying to answer a question that was not asked. Paul did write "day of Christ" believe it.

This is certainly not a "diversion." It is very much a part of the text and must be understood as part of the context.We really DON'T know what he wrote, for no one has his original letter. All we have is several copies of texts that disagree.

Most of the prophets of the Old Testament wrote of "the day of the Lord." Only Paul wrote of "the day of Christ." The day of the Lord is a dark day and a day of wrath. All the Old Testament prophets agree on that. Paul's use of the Day of Christ does not seem to have any dark connotation to it.

I believe "the day of Christ" is for the believer, while "the day of the Lord" is for the nonbeliever. Perhaps then, Paul's use of the "Day of Christ" and the Old Testament use of "The day of the Lord" is speaking of the very same period of time, but from a different perspective.

There will be nothing in the Day of the Lord that a believer should fear. Especially not for a pretrib believer, for we believe we won't see the Day of the Lord or His wrath.

I might add, Paul had previously written to the same group of people where he wrote. "For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night."

Many times postribbers have come up with the argument that for a pretrib believer, when we see that we have been left behind, our faith will be shattered.

Compare that with what Paul was writing about: believers whose faith was shattered because they assumed they had been left behind. They were highly upset. According to Paul, they thought the DAY had come. I really don't think it matters what we call "the day." We know they were very upset in thinking the day had previously begun and they were not IN THE DAY. Can we agree so far?

WHY were these believers upset? Could it be because they thought they were "left behind" - exactly the argument posttribbers make of pretribbers today, supposing pretribbers faith will be shattered when we find we are left behind?

Of course Paul knows they were not "left behind" and Paul knows "THE DAY" has not yet even arrived. But Paul does not come right out and write that "you have not been left behind." No, his argument was so that they would KNOW beyond any shadow of doubt when they see certain things, they could be guaranteed to be IN "the day."

In other words, Paul knew that the revealing of the man of sin would come during "THE DAY" and some time after the start of "the day."

Do you agree so far? I think our biggest disagreement here is simply what Paul meant by "apostasia."

 

[iamlamad]

The definition of the word, and the way it is used in Acts 21:21 answers your question but you choose to ignore that in favor or your opinion.

Let's go to the fair.
It is a fair day.

He was killed with a lead pipe.
If you are going to lead, then lead!

He hit the ball so hard, he broke the bat.
The bat swooped down and landed in my hair!

I caught a five pound bass on my first cast!
He sings bass in a quartet.

Just finding how a word is used in one verse does not tell us for sure how it will be used in another verse. We must understand the meaning of word by the context of that word.